WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/02 by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Beef and live cattle exports to the Middle East and North Africa.
Date: 2002-04-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Middle East, North Africa, beef, cattle, export (EU), statistics

C 277 E/106

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

since 1976 (the first two in 1976 and 1979 were national, the other two international competitions) and
still the matter is still unresolved. There are associations such as the Citizens’ Movement that are opposed
to the work on the grounds that the site earmarked for the purpose is an archaeological site where
excavations have not yet been completed, as the finds in the area during recent work on the Athens
Underground show.

A further problem is caused by the fact that one of the requirements in the recent competition is that
visitors must be able to see the Parthenon sculptures in the new museum and the Parthenon itself on the
Acropolis at the same time. The only way to achieve this is to raise the museum five metres above the
listed von Weiler building which is located in the area and ignore all the restrictions imposed on this area
in order to protect the Acropolis site. Under the exceptions allowed in the invitation to tender, the south
side of the Museum would be 40 metres high, i.e. between 15 and 20 metres higher than the blocks of
flats in the area, and would be an eyesore in this historic site.

However, the fourth competition in a row has also caused problems. After the failure to hold the third
competition (an open international competition which failed owing to the opposition of scientific bodies
and neighbours) the Ministry of Culture held the fourth competition which, as the press commented, was
so lacking in transparency that many thought the contract was awarded directly to the winners. It should
be pointed out that the winner of the competition was one of 20 architects and academics from all over
the world who had written a letter five years ago to the Greek Government calling on it to reconsider its
decision and reverse its decision to build a large museum at the Makyriannis site.

Is the Commission aware of the above issue, and what is its position? Is it directly or indirectly funding
(through the CSF or Community initiatives and programmes) the construction of the museum in question?
Are the Greek authorities obliged to notify it about all the stages of the project and the choices they make?
Does it intend to look into the entire matter, and what measures does it intend to take to clarify this
situation completely?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 2002)

Within the Community support framework for Greece during the programming period 2000-2006, the
European Regional Development Fund co-finances structural
In
particular, the operational programme (OP) on culture aims, amongst other things, to improve the building
and technological infrastructure in existing museums as well as to create new ones including the Acropolis
museum.

interventions in the cultural sector.

The Commission is informed that an invitation to tender concerning a study was published in August
2000 (restricted procedure following the Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the co-
ordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (1)). The contract awarded to a
consortium was signed in December 2001. In March 2002, the Central Archaeological Council approved
unanimously the preliminary design and models submitted to it by the consortium. As such,
the
completion of the study is at its final stage.

Following the information received from the Greek authorities, the OP managing authority has not yet
approved the Acropolis museum project. Nevertheless, in application of the principle of subsidiarity, the
responsibility for the actions to be carried out
the
implementation of the project must be done in accordance with the legislation in force, and the managing
authority is responsible for the supervision and follow up of the project.

lies entirely with the Member State. Clearly,

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.

(2002/C 277 E/119)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0918/02

by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 April 2002)

Subject: Beef and live cattle exports to the Middle East and North Africa

Would the Commission let me know what proportion of the Community’s exports of cattle to the Middle
East and North Africa are in the form of meat and what proportion are exported as live animals?

14.11.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 277 E/107

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

In the table below are listed the quantities (expressed in carcass weight equivalent) of live cattle and beef
exported by the Community to the Middle East and North Africa in the three most recent calendar years.

Middle East
Live cattle
Meat

North Africa
Live cattle
Meat

Community exports in carcass weight eq.

1999

2000

2001

(tonnes)

56 912
89 347

51 387
67 240

Total

146 259

118 627

22 066
220 050

Total

242 116

21 918
182 805

204 723

40 794
3 625

44 419

334
9 268

9 602

Source: Eurostat B Comext 9.4.2002.

(2002/C 277 E/120)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0921/02

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(26 March 2002)

Subject: Former Director-General of the DG for the Environment joining BNFL Board

Jim Currie, the former Director-General of the European Commission’s DG for the Environment, who has
knowledge and extremely privileged information about Commission nuclear policy, has recently been
appointed to the Board of British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL) in the UK.

Articles 16 and 17 of the Staff Regulations state that officials have a duty to act with integrity and
discretion with regard to the acceptance of posts after leaving the Commission. What action can be taken
by the Commission to ensure that privileged information and confidential inside knowledge held by former
Commission employees who take up outside posts directly relevant to their Commission employment is
not improperly passed on to other bodies?

What financial benefits is Mr Currie required to make public after taking early retirement in October 2001
in addition to the reputed GBP 20 000 that he will be paid yearly by BNFL?

Have any other former employees of the DG for the Environment taken up employment with BNFL?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

Former permanent officials and other servants who have left the service are required to comply with
Articles 16 and 17 of the Staff Regulations.

Article 16 in particular provides that, after termination of service with the Institution, the official must
respect obligations of integrity and discretion in relation to the acceptance of certain duties or functions.